The Dallas daily herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1887, 1887-02-16
"Never Burn a Letter"

Mr.. Serene E. Todd, Orange, N. j.,
gives counsel in accord with that oil
Talleyrand-'never burn letter"
And he tells, through the Husband
man, of curiously interesting law
case, the plaintiff in which probably
lamented his failure to heed the other
half OF the artul Frenchman's advice
nor write one:
"Our homestead cost me over Sl2,
900, but my wife refused to live longer
in that part OF the State, hence ! was
obliged to sell for what Icould get. A
man from Ohio purchased the prop
erty, and was well pleased with it for
nearly year. Another man offered
him $500 more than he paid me, but
he refused to sell. After the lapse OF
almost q year, his wife became home
sick, and said they must return to
Ohio. So he sent n lawyer to requst me
to take the property back and refund
the money. refused. So they concoct-
ed a big scare, by filing bill against
me, in the Supreme Court, for selling
that property under false pretepces.
They laid damages at So, 200! Where
as, they only paid $4,000, and they
had occupied the place year, and
got q hundred bushels, or more, OF
peaches, besides the crop OF grapes
and other fruit. ] answered their bill
by denying in good understandable
English, every allegation. They had
three competent lawyers and lots OF
witnesses, whose oral testimony made
me appear to have been an incorrigi
BILE falsiIier. When the proper time
came to cross-eXamine witnesses ]
asked only a few questions, all OF
which they denied.
An expert reader OF countenances
could perceive readily that the Judge
jury and all Others were thinking that
an old knaYe had been caught this
time. was alone, and only a lay
man-lawyer at that. But what
lacked in legal twaddle ! supplied in
Yankee pluck. After the other side
had been heard, requested the
privilege OF asking the plaintiff u few
questions. He took the witness stand
again, when Inquired OF him aboutas
follows; Did you not write so and soY
No, sir Didn't you agreeso and soY
'No,sir.' Thus ] went on, very coolly,
and with as much indifference as
could manifest, until / had induced
him to deny and re-deny emphatica!ly
and absolutely. Then took one let
ter at q time. and unfolded it and
showed it to him but would not allow
him to read one), and courteously
inquired; is that your writing?
Y-yesl That name is your signature,
is iii? Yves You do not deny
writing those letters with Your owl
penY' WE'LL should like to read
them again, said he with much emo.
ton. DO you deny writing any por
ton ofether those lettes?' Iinquir'
ed. NO, Ican't deny my own writing.
That is sufficient, said.
"Then asked the court to ALLOW
me to read those letters. Before had
finished, the evidence seemed so over.
whelmingly contradictory to the ora
testimony that the plaintiff actually
tainted and fell down on the floor Ike
a dead man, and the court took a re.
cess Tor an hour. Those silent letters
told the story The Judge, in summing
up the evidence and IN giving his charge
to the jury, ignored all their false ties
timony, and told the jury, as he pro
coded: "There was no deceit practised
therel you cannot make fraud out Of
thatl After allowing a purchaser tc
live on place several months before
he was asked to pay for 1t (as the evi
dence ofboth parties shows was done),
you can't find verdict for selling
property under false pretenses. Nc
one can conjecture what the verdict
would have been in the absence o
those silent letters. In consequence o.
the practice of filing all letters won
that suit, and the prosecution was.
saddled with all the costs, which
[ was told) to outS250.'
pnunrfr ~